Tiller aborted

Post Reply New Topic

You have assumed that a fetus should be considered a person. There is no Biblical basis for the nonsensical belief that "Life begins at conception."

Yes, he did. Now give equally correct mention for how Tiller's victims died. Or will you use a double-standard, and get out your politically-correct euphemism dictionary to describe their killings?

It's interesting, isn't it folks? The outrage over the death of a man who spent his career with babies' blood on his hands, squeezing the life from their tiny, defenseless bodies. Versus the cone of silence around those innocent babies' deaths at Tiller's hands.
Everyone crows and crows and crows when a mass-murderer get killed. None of those same people sheds a tear over his countless, innocent victims.

I didn't say I speak for God, but I know enough that if God is as all-knowing as everyone says he is, he's not taking religious sides produced by mortals. That'd be merely a fact for an omnipotent and immortal being.

This is the second time you've cut off a sentence of mine in a post. A little strange if you think you're right and have a sound argument.








Your hypocrisy on life is blatant. I didn't say I advocate for or against life, nor did I bring up the subject of real estate. Whether or not someone else chooses to end a family member's life is not my decision; but cold-blooded, pre-meditated, planned murder upon an unarmed man is against the law, no matter what legal activities that man has done that you do not agree with.

You may not know this, but some people take off their clothes for money - and in Las Vegas, some are paid for sexual exploits.
Should they or their employers be shot and killed for their legal activities that you do not agree with?

What about animal euthanasia? After all, life is life, no matter what species you are.
Should the veterinarians who provide that legal service be murdered in cold blood as well?

If you truly believed every life was valuable, you wouldn't condone any murder, but condone the saving grace of your savior Jesus Christ to rid all individuals of sin and their 'evil ways'.

But you don't - which negates you being pro-life, really. You may label yourself as such, but it's merely a label - shallow and meaningless to the truth inside.

Oh?

Jer 1:5:
God speaking: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations."

Lev 17:11:
God speaking: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood."
So, when there is blood in a fetus, it is alive. If it were just a tumor, and not a new lifeform as a baby is, the life would be that of the host, and not a separate, new life. But fetuses are new lifeforms. Very young human beings.

The outrage is partially over the violation of US laws, partially over murder, and partially over how this murder was accomplished, as it was done in a church.

In this thread, the outrage is at your behavior. Why? Because you are talking about the rightness of murder. Is this murder? Well, yes. Even if death is just, the murder of this man according to the laws governing society is still a murder and in a place where most people particularly recognize that murders should not be committed, and to exalt it is something that most people understand to clearly be wrong.

Perhaps this seems strange to you, but let's even look at it this way: how many Christian teachings are there that a person should take justice into their own hands and flout the laws governing society? Would you advocate that Christians rise up and commit the mass murder of anyone who has ever been involved in an abortion? If not, then how can you justify your behavior now? If you can, then can't you recognize why others will see your behavior as a terrible extreme?

Again, no I am not. I'm talking about the acceptability of the present case: a continuous killer being dead.
My view is a complex, even complicated one, I'll grant you, but I want you to understand it.
As I already stated, I'm not saying Tiller's killer made the right decision in killing him. I'm saying only what I'm saying, which is that Tiller's death isn't a bad thing.

If you put extra words in my mouth, you're no longer arguing with me or my views.

Last edited by Ragtime on 03 Jun 2009, 3:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm saying only what I'm saying, which is that Tiller's death isn't a bad thing.


I have to call you out, its a very bad thing. Using your logic, if someone executed the pope, it wouldn't be bad because of all of his crimes. You fail to grasp the fact that NOT EVERYONE THINKS LIKE YOU! You say its murder, fine, DON'T GET A FREAKING ABORTION! I say its a woman's right to choose if she can be able to care for a kid. I have heard many evil things in the name of morality, if a woman gets raped at age 12 and has a child, you say she should have it, despite the fact A. its a baby from rape. B, she is twelve, C. She can not possibly raise it by herself.

A question for my fellow pro-choice advocates: if you could go back in time and kill Hitler would you do it? Would that be murder?

That'd be the same as hating JFK and saying that his death wasn't a bad thing. Or that someone you didn't like in high school dying and that you think their death wasn't a bad thing.

Saying that any person's death isn't a bad thing goes against your stance completely.

It sounds as if you'd rather kill your opponents rather than compromise or work with them for a common solution in a democratic way.

No, and that is only because of the law of uninteded consquences, Hilter is killed off, Eistein never comes to the US, the war with japan drags on and millions of american lives are lost in the planned invasion of the japanese mainland. Not to mention america loses the space race since we do not capture berlin and acquire the technology from the V2 rocket, thereby all space releated tech (GPS) never existed.

No. The U.S. sponsored the rise of the third Reich, and many U.S.-Euro policies from WWI-on encouraged and developed Hitler's world view and who he ultimately became, not to mention the fascist state of Germany.

Even if you did kill Hitler as a child or before he was a dictator, someone else would eventually rise up - Himmler, etc.

I actually came up with the first part of your question as a mental exercise with the condition the only time you could get to him was when he was a baby in his crib or maybe up to like 3 years old. I also wouldn't due to unintended consequences - no way was Japan going to win WWII - but without the war weakening them and the buildup of the west due to the war, Stalin may have been much more powerful and even conquered Europe.

I'm sorry, I forget that we are aspies

Ignore the law of unintended consequences

You could kill him before he rose to power.

Would you do it?

Would you consider it murder?

no, because if I could go back in time, I would kill the idoit who came up with religion and save everyone the head ache of fools and their sky gods

If I could do it and it wouldn't change things yes. But there'd always be unknown/unintended consequences - hell, someone who died in the holocaust or the war could survive and wind up being as bad as Hitler 20 years later - with nuclear weapons.


eta I'm a big time Alternative History fan so these sort of things I've thought a lot about.

Well he was killed by the way he lived.

Him going to church and still practice what he did is not right. Any good church doesn't believe in abortions so he shouldn't have been allowed into the church until he stopped what he did.